Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-05-2015, 07:52 AM   #31
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 69
QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
I can't see how it compares to LCDs vs CRTs. Who ever complained about the former? Yes, it took a while for LCDs to reach the quality of CRTs, but ti was always a matter of degree.
The very first time I saw a color LCD, I was blown away by its sharpness and contrast. To me it was obviously superior. However, there were other people who griped about LCD refresh rate and color accuracy for several years. I couldn't even see what they were talking about -- but they were doing different things with their computers.
Well, there you have it. As of now, LCDs are able to do 95% of what CRTs did, and better. That's now. And that's because they've been improving since day one, whereas CRTs had not much where to go.

Compare classic Polaroids with a modern Instax. The Instax is as of now almost able to be used like an old Polaroid was. Almost, but not quite. And it can get to the point where it will be better, but the money isn't there (I think the market is, -ish, but the marketing is far from adequate and the final products themselves seem to have a lot of people in the design team that have no idea what they're doing.

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
I
A 'mirrorless' camera is just a crippled SLR, not something different.
Crippled???? I have no idea how you figure that.
It can be easily deduced from the -less bit - it is just like an SLR but without an important bit and unable to do what was done through it, and all it gains is being smaller, but it isn't by a large degree, and the lenses can be almost as big.
I can't really put it more clearly than I did from the outset - each and every thing that you can put in a mirrorless camera to make it better, you can also put in an SLR. That's the opposite of LCDs vs CRTs.

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
I
Each and every thing that you can put in a mirrorless camera to make it better, you can also put in an SLR.
I don't see any DSLR with an EVF.

When I first learned photography on a 35mm SLR, composing and focusing through the taking lens was a revelation to me. It was the ultimate. This was how I wanted to take pictures. However. . . Unfortunately, today's DSLR optical viewfinders aren't really the same thing. They're relatively small, dim, and lack focusing aids. They're not the ultimate. An EVF works better in dim light (because it gains up the image), gives a better visual impression of exposure, offers focus aids such as magnification or focus peaking, and can overlay more readable info about the camera settings and status. To me, an EVF is obviously better than an OVF in much the same way that first color LCD was obviously better than a CRT.
See? If and when that becomes the general perception, then SLRs will start having EVFs. Or rather hybrid OEVFs, like the Fuji X100 and famly.

The reason they don't yet is precisely that EVFs aren't considered up to the job, globally speaking, even if in specific situations they may have an edge (unlimited gain).

SLRs didn't generally used to have 'Live View' either, they have now. Touchscreens were derided, and yet touch focusing opens a lot of possibilities (and given the slowness of contrast AF, it can sometimes dispense with the need for a remote shutter).

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
I think the size issue is overblown. However. . . DSLRs have seemed to just get bigger and bigger, and lenses to some extent have done so too. They've gotten much bigger than the old 35mm SLR systems that reporters used to carry for portability, not for image quality. Medium format cameras continued to rule the studio, and other situations where traveling light wasn't a priority. Now DSLRs have grown to the size of medium format film cameras, and they've lost some of that easy portability that originally propelled 35mm SLRs to success. What mirrorless systems have done is bring portable systems back down to about the size they used to be.
Like with the Polaroid issue, and the viewfinder issue, what irks me is that in so many fronts we are only now recovering the small great conveniences we had in former eras. That's why I'm aggravated that Pentax has no EVFs. Or that Q lenses are few. The old order was replaced before the new order was ready. I don't see that so often in other fields.

---------- Post added 08-05-15 at 03:57 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I'm sure Pentax is throwing around mirrorless ideas. For now, they seem to have decided that the Q and GR lines are the ways to go there. It is hard to imagine them throwing over the K mount -- that seems to be who they are, but certainly if they make a mirrorless camera, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to keep the k mount. I don't imagine they could make it a whole lot smaller than the K-01 and keep the k mount and honestly, the kx and K-S1 are similarly sized to the K-01.

At the same time, it would be pretty discouraging to see Pentax begin the process of designing a whole new line up of lenses for a new mirrorless mount. I can't imagine how many years that would take. I guess Pentaxians who have a line up of k mount lenses can be forgiven if they don't relish that particular thought.
You could make a tiny K-mount mirrorless camera, the problem is that the distance from the lens to the sensor has to be almost 2 inches, like with any 35mm mount (well, some used smaller distances, but always more than an inch). There's no way around that limitation, and it goes for Pentax, Canon, Nikon, or anyone else. That means that the system will hardly ever be pocketable, even with a DA40 XS.

08-05-2015, 08:01 AM - 1 Like   #32
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
Well, there you have it. As of now, LCDs are able to do 95% of what CRTs did, and better. That's now. And that's because they've been improving since day one, whereas CRTs had not much where to go.
Exactly like EVF vs OVF. The OVF its mirror has not much where to go anymore. But the current best EVFs are already better and are still in their infancly.


QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
- each and every thing that you can put in a mirrorless camera to make it better, you can also put in an SLR. That's the opposite of LCDs vs CRTs.
Like zooming via the VF to focus more accurately? Oh, no wait you can't do that in an OVF. Focus peaking then? No... Err, video in the eye level VF? Displaying Histograms during composition? Instant review of taken picture in the VF? The list goes on and on...
08-05-2015, 08:08 AM - 1 Like   #33
Veteran Member
clockworkrat's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Black Isle, Scotland
Posts: 405
I could imagine a K-mount module for the GXR system being an excellent opportunity for Ricoh to benefit from their acquisition of Pentax. They already have a Leica M-mount module.
08-05-2015, 09:53 AM   #34
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Exactly like EVF vs OVF. The OVF its mirror has not much where to go anymore. But the current best EVFs are already better and are still in their infancly.



Like zooming via the VF to focus more accurately? Oh, no wait you can't do that in an OVF. Focus peaking then? No... Err, video in the eye level VF? Displaying Histograms during composition? Instant review of taken picture in the VF? The list goes on and on...
When are DSLRs going to catch up to mirrorless? One takes an OVF and a mirrorless into a cafe, or indoors anywhere - and the OVF just turns dim by comparison. There's no adjustable brightness to it. My Sony aps cameras have both an Auto and manual gain for brightness. 2 friends from my photo club met for lunch to see Don's A7R and A7s cameras. I thought my K3 was broken, the OVF was so dim compared to the mirrorless.

This morning i read this: Canon profits down 16% as demand for old-style DSLRs continues to slide - EOSHD - EOSHD Forum

"Demand for old style dslrs continues to slide" - says it all.

Last week, an audubon style shooter, invited me over to his house where he's got a blind and garden features setup to shoot hummers and other birds who visit his back yard and fountain. He let me use one of his pair of Nikon D4, with a 200-400 lens attached, while he used an 800mm lens. I wanted a bird picture for a composition i was making and he generously gave me that opportunity. Nikon Equipment was great and i got the pictures i needed. What shocked me was the noise of the D4s. I had a blue jay look up at me, as if to say, whats the racket up there. I'm used to the relative quietness of the K3, and the D4, a $5000+ camera is not even close. When you hit the high burst shots, its ,loud.

Another friend of mine who's a Canon shooter, just purchased a Sony A7RII and it should be shipping today.

The A7RII and the A7S both have silent "rolling" shutters, which for playhouse shooting is a valuable option. None of the FF DSLRS out there have anything like it. "Everyone" seems to predict that the Pentax FF is going to be a DSLR. I'm not interested in another DSLR, so if my Canon friend's Sony FF mirrorless works out -that's likely to be the way i'm headed.

08-05-2015, 11:38 AM   #35
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 69
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Exactly like EVF vs OVF. The OVF its mirror has not much where to go anymore. But the current best EVFs are already better and are still in their infancly.



Like zooming via the VF to focus more accurately? Oh, no wait you can't do that in an OVF. Focus peaking then? No... Err, video in the eye level VF? Displaying Histograms during composition? Instant review of taken picture in the VF? The list goes on and on...
You seem fixated on the idea that an SLR can't have an EVF. Where did you get that bizarre idea from?

Or, better, a hybrid, which is something that's impossible in a mirrorless, because, err, well, it can't do optical TTL.
08-05-2015, 01:32 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
You seem fixated on the idea that an SLR can't have an EVF. Where did you get that bizarre idea from?
Sure it can... But why would I want one?!? Since I use a camera with EVF the advantages only became more clear. I barely pick up my SLR anymore.
08-05-2015, 02:28 PM   #37
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 69
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Sure it can... But why would I want one?!? Since I use a camera with EVF the advantages only became more clear. I barely pick up my SLR anymore.
Try to keep focus. We're discussing what is it that you can put on a mirrorless camera that you can't put in an SLR. As you point out, the reason SLRs don't come with EVFs already is that the technology isn't mature enough. Mirrorless cameras, being crippled, have no other choice, mature tech or not.
08-05-2015, 09:19 PM   #38
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
Try to keep focus. We're discussing what is it that you can put on a mirrorless camera that you can't put in an SLR. As you point out, the reason SLRs don't come with EVFs already is that the technology isn't mature enough. Mirrorless cameras, being crippled, have no other choice, mature tech or not.
You are playing word games. Sure, one could attach a lot of things to an slr, but when you look at the existing SLR products from Canikon, they have basically not changed their basic form in years, just iterating more mp. And meanwhile, Canon DSLR sales are sliding 16% in the last quarter according to the link above and will continue to slide the rest of the year according to the same article. Mirrorless are at least staying even or moving up in their sales.


Last edited by philbaum; 08-05-2015 at 09:28 PM.
08-05-2015, 10:40 PM   #39
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,700
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Sure it can... But why would I want one?!? Since I use a camera with EVF the advantages only became more clear. I barely pick up my SLR anymore.

Well, I think EVFs are overrated, Clavius.


I have them on an A7 and a NEX7, and they're .... meh.


Focus peaking and Magnified View are both found on Pentax DSLRs these days. They're features of Live View.


Give me an OVF with split-prism focussing screen for manual glass any day.
08-06-2015, 07:48 AM   #40
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,728
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
Try to keep focus. We're discussing what is it that you can put on a mirrorless camera that you can't put in an SLR.
Actually, the OP asked about Pentax's MILC plans.

As I've said several times,I would like Pentax to expand the Q-family by providing a wide-angle prime lens. My personal belief is that would greatly expand the utility of the Q-family at a reasonable price.

Right now, I would expect Pentax to release something else only if that would enable them to do something they are not currently doing. Canon's SL-1 was attempt to make a smallish camera while staying within DSLR technology. The limitations of K-mount suggest that Pentax might follow a similar route right now if they feel size is an issue (reducing size of the grip would be a good start).

I am guessing that they will go with something like a K-02 only if the market lurches towards MILC, and away from DSLR, for all relatively inexpensive ILCs. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they already have such a camera mostly designed should the occasion unexpectedly arise,

QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
As you point out, the reason SLRs don't come with EVFs already is that the technology isn't mature enough. Mirrorless cameras, being crippled, have no other choice, mature tech or not.
There has been a lot of talk in this thread about the superiority of EVF in low-light situations. Yes, low light is a strength of EVF, just a bright light is a weakness of LCD. In my particular case, in most cases I already have a picture in mind when I put the viewfinder to my eye, which means that I have to be able to see something before I even think of photographing it. OVF is one of the strengths of Pentax; in most cases, if I can see it directly I can see enough through my Pentax OVF to compose the picture I already have in mind, regardless of level of light, so for me the EVF provides less of an advantage than others have suggested.

We visited our daughter in San Diego last spring. When picking out landmarks to frame the landscape picture already in my mind, I had less difficulty with my DSLR than I did with my Q7, even though I was using my hoodman clone with the latter; this is why some of us have talked about limitations of the Q7 LCD, but more relevant to the immediate discussion, it tells me that an EVF needs to have somewhat more pixels than that LCD does.

Last edited by reh321; 08-06-2015 at 08:33 AM.
08-06-2015, 10:14 AM   #41
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Lake District
Posts: 221
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
Try to keep focus. We're discussing what is it that you can put on a mirrorless camera that you can't put in an SLR. As you point out, the reason SLRs don't come with EVFs already is that the technology isn't mature enough. Mirrorless cameras, being crippled, have no other choice, mature tech or not.
Crippled? It's not crippled, it's a design philosophy, nothing more, nothing less.
Your obvious bias with statements like this will devalue your comments.
J
08-07-2015, 03:24 PM   #42
Senior Member
Mothballs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 259
I just find EVFs clunky and laggy. Even with new systems, latency is noticeable and i can get headaches from when action makes the EVF "stutter"

I find it much easier to track action with an optical system.
08-07-2015, 07:22 PM   #43
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,728
QuoteOriginally posted by Mothballs Quote
I just find EVFs clunky and laggy. Even with new systems, latency is noticeable and i can get headaches from when action makes the EVF "stutter"

I find it much easier to track action with an optical system.
Yes, action will probably be the last stronghold for DSLR cameras.
08-08-2015, 11:36 PM   #44
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Mothballs Quote
I just find EVFs clunky and laggy. Even with new systems, latency is noticeable and i can get headaches from when action makes the EVF "stutter"

I find it much easier to track action with an optical system.
Which specific camera and model are you talking about? I've never seen EVF stutter or much latency to speak of. Seems like so many complaints about EVFs are from folks that don't seem to have tried a modern version. Afterall, the Liveview monitor is a type of EVF and noone complains about them on DSLRs. I've never seen complaints about latency or EVF stutter on a Sony mirrorless forum.
08-09-2015, 09:16 AM   #45
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,728
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Which specific camera and model are you talking about? I've never seen EVF stutter or much latency to speak of. Seems like so many complaints about EVFs are from folks that don't seem to have tried a modern version. Afterall, the Liveview monitor is a type of EVF and noone complains about them on DSLRs. I've never seen complaints about latency or EVF stutter on a Sony mirrorless forum.
I've never used a Sony camera under actual conditions. This is the issue I was talking about with my Q7 when I took a picture of an Amtrak train - for a couple of seconds after I pressed the shutter part-way the image froze.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/284548-dslr-q7-what-your-big...intment-6.html
I've been thinking that the answer is more processing power. If Sony has gotten past this issue, that is great! Regardless, I hope that Pentax is able to do it, because action photography is a genuine use of cameras, and I always hate for them to self-exclude from any use.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
35mm, camera, digital camera, evfs, lcds, lenses, lot, mirrorless, pentax, slr, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
mirrorless lens mounts Tony Belding Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 31 02-04-2014 11:22 PM
Why mirrorless? jon404 Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 32 12-04-2013 01:18 PM
mirrorless vs dslr hansangpyo Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 13 08-23-2013 11:33 AM
Mirrorless Party top-quark Photographic Industry and Professionals 4 05-11-2013 08:59 AM
Pentax mirrorless FF? Bestzoom Pentax Full Frame 102 05-05-2013 02:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:04 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top